The article Nick D'Aloisio has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article reads like a self-promotional marketing piece with leading and suggestive language being littered throughout. It would appear that this page was written by the subject and was only established after a blast of media attention. Not a notable subject.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

The article Google Speaks has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No references for the book or notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{ dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{ dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shadowjams ( talk) 10:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC) reply

The article Good Faith Collaboration has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No claim of WP:Notability, certainly nothing that achives WP:Notability (books).

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nat Gertler ( talk) 04:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Airbnb requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 12:57, 12 June 2011 (UTC) reply

The article Acqui-hire has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The article is about a neologism, and the sources either only use the word, or contain a short definition. As per WP:NEO.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 23:46, 10 July 2011 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Acqui-hire is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acqui-hire until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 06:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC) reply

please do not move articles again without reaching a consensus like you did here.-- Rafy talk 19:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Wilhelm Ahrens (mathematician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The Determinator p t c 13:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC) reply

On 9 July 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Double bubble conjecture, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the shape that encloses two given volumes and has the minimum possible surface area is the double bubble commonly formed by soap bubbles? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Double bubble conjecture. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 16:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC) reply

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Paul Pétau, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.archive.org/stream/explorer1998lasa/explorer1998lasa_djvu.txt.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot ( talk) 22:01, 23 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks very much for your contributions, which I've enjoyed reading through very much this evening - a very congenial mix of tech businesses, recreational mathematics and bibliographic interest! I've added some categories etc. but hopefully haven't taken anything away from your pages. (If you're using John Lauris Blake's General Biographical Dictionary to find individuals lacking a wikibio, it looks as if it's worth having a good look for the name forms which are most commonly used today in case they're different.) Thanks again, & best wishes, Dsp13 ( talk) 01:07, 25 July 2012 (UTC) reply

The article List of OEIS sequences has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable per WP:LISTN; no indication this list is of note based on sources. In particular it does not appear on OEIS. So as a list entirely original research.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JohnBlackburne ^words _deeds 12:33, 26 July 2012 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of OEIS sequences is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of OEIS sequences until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JohnBlackburne ^words _deeds 13:22, 26 July 2012 (UTC) reply

You are doing a great job, but I would like to talk to you about your citations, as you aren't following our guidelines and readers can't see what they are without clicking on them. I'd also like to know if you think that a website that says the Great Sphinx is 10,000 years old is really a good source. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 16:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Regarding Formatting of Citations:

I guess it's best to leave that work to the bots. For me, the researching and creation of articles has a higher priority than the fixing of citations.

Since I get very little free time (I have a full time job you see), I realize that it's better to spend that time on the creation of articles. The correct formatting of citations is obvious and anyone can do it. The Real Challenge is in being able to FIND the most relevant citations in the first place, that is precisely what drew me to Wikipedia.

Novonium ( talk) 06:04, 31 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello Novonium,

It seems to me that an article you worked on, Coin Rotation Paradox, may be copied from http://www.jimloy.com/puzz/coin.htm. It's entirely possible that I made a mistake, but I wanted to let you know because Wikipedia is strict about copying from other sites.

It's important that you edit the article and rewrite it in your own words, unless you're absolutely certain nothing in it is copied. If you're not sure how to fix the problem or have any questions, there are people at the help desk who are happy to assist you.

Thank you for helping build a free encyclopedia! CorenSearchBot ( talk) 20:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi Novonium. I have redirected your article De Méré's Problem to the article about the Chevalier de Méré (actual name Antoine Gombaud). There are a number of serious problems with the article. First you described it as a paradox which it is not. Moreover, you're actually describing two different things: a question about fair rules for a betting game and a question about the probability of winning a certain dice game. The two are independent questions and are not connected although both questions came from de Méré. Finally, the article was basically two lengthy quotes from the sources and I believe it failed if not the letter then at least the spirit of our policies on copyright. If you wish to fix these problems, I still believe it would be best to include that material in the article on Gombaud which is quite short and could use examples of the questions he asked to Pascal and Fermat. Best, Pichpich ( talk) 02:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Your two recent "paradox" articles are orphans, i.e. no other articles link to them. If you know of others that should link to them, could you add those links? Michael Hardy ( talk) 22:33, 3 August 2012 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Siegel's Paradox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Pichpich ( talk) 22:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Batrachion is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Batrachion until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Pichpich ( talk) 01:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello.

Please note my recent edits to Dudley triangle. In particular:

• External Links, with a capital "L", is incorrect. I changed it to External links. Generally one does not capitalize an initial letter merely because it's in a section heading. See WP:MOS.
• The initial sentence said "The Dudley Triangle is a triangle similar to the Pascal's Triangle that was discovered by Underwood Dudley." This will be understood by those who know what Pascal's triangle is, but others may think you're talking about a geometric triangle, possibly even a triangularly shaped physical object. I changed it to say: "In mathematics, the Dudley triangle is a triangular array of numbers similar to the Pascal's triangle that was discovered by Underwood Dudley." In cases where the title of the article does not make clear to the non-mathematically inclined reader that mathematics is what it's about, that should be explicit at the beginning. Things like "In geometry,..." or "In algebra,..." can also be used, but "In functional analysis,..." doesn't work because the lay reader has never heard of that.
• You wrote:

a(m,n) = (m*m+m*n+n*n-1) mod n+m+1

One can write instead

a(m, n) = (m² + mn+n² − 1) mod n + m + 1

This notation italicizes the variables (but not digits and not parentheses, etc.) consistently with TeX style. It also has proper spacing before and after plus and minus signs, etc. The asterisk for multiplication is a workaround for use when proper symbols are not available. Here one can write things like 4 × 3 or 4·3, etc.

However, I decided to use TeX in this instance instead. Sometimes one avoids TeX in an inline setting on Wikipedia because it fails to line up neatly with the text, but in a "displayed" setting, it works well.

Michael Hardy ( talk) 19:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC) reply

The article Encyclopedia of Mathematics (James Tanton) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of professional reviews. No evidence of meeting WP:NBOOK.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stuartyeates ( talk) 21:32, 11 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating The Birth of Plenty, Novonium!

Wikipedia editor SarahStierch has tagged the page as having some issues to fix. In addition, they wrote this note for you:

The book has only had positive reviews? It's best to have both positive and negative reviews.

The tags on the page can be removed by you or another editor when the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on SarahStierch's talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the the Teahouse.

Learn more about page curation.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cute number is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cute number until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. SarahStierch ( talk) 08:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Isovolume problem is an "orphaned" article, i.e. no other articles link to it. If you can think of other articles that ought to link to it, could you add those links? Michael Hardy ( talk) 00:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC) reply

The article Alison Behnke has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

As presented in this article the claim of notability is not correctly verified in reliable sources. Without this verification the article may not remain here.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fiddle Faddle 12:18, 19 October 2013 (UTC) Fiddle Faddle 12:18, 19 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, Novonium. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Vsevolod Safonov, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Vsevolod Safonov to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, TheProudEditor ( talk) 18:31, 19 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm Benison P Baby. Novonium, thanks for creating Nicolas Vignier!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add categories and citations.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Benison talk with me 07:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. Novonium, thanks for creating Thomas Henzinger!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. 4

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sulfurboy ( talk) 18:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. Novonium, thanks for creating Monika Henzinger!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. 5

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sulfurboy ( talk) 18:23, 30 October 2013 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Nicolas Vignier Jr. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. — Mr. V ( t – c) 03:39, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

The article Warden Boyd Rayward has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet notability requirements for WP:ACADEMIC

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Keithbob • Talk • 01:07, 26 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited In Praise of Copying, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Yorker ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:05, 31 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Please look at my edits to André-Charles Cailleau. Notice that

• I have set the title phrase --- the person's name --- in bold at its first appearance;
• The range of years has an en-dash, not a hyphen. The same should be used in ranges of pages and the like;
• It says "External links", with a lower-case initial "l", not a capital L.

These are prescribed by WP:MOS. One does not use a capital initial letter merely because a word is in a section heading. Michael Hardy ( talk) 23:39, 31 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I noticed you are using bare URLs for references in many new articles you create. Please include proper references and help us all prevent link rot. Thank you. Superp ( talk) 07:00, 8 May 2014 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Charles-Antoine Jombert requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. KJ ^{«Click Here»} 13:44, 12 May 2014 (UTC) reply

As reviewing administrator, I've made sure it won't be speedy deleted. But it cannot stay in the current state--please expand it form the Italian WP or the journal article linked to there. Please do it quickly. Don't assume all the people who edit the English WP will recognize this sort of notability unless it is spelled out for them in detail.

If you can't deal with the Italian, ask me on my talk p. and I'll find someone. It's a little too complicated for my rudimentary knowledge. DGG ( talk ) 20:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC) reply

I wanted to call your attention to it, so you might be aware, as an Admin that has acted there. I have placed Talk section notes for the past year or two, without any response or comment.

I will nevertheless proceed slowly, and using only the best sources. (I am a professional medicinal/org chemist with doctoral level training, and both industry and academic professional experience.)

Let me know of any concerns. I wish to make progress, but at first sign of edit warring, I will depart the article, for good. Le Prof Leprof 7272 ( talk) 14:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Reagle is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Reagle until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Geogene ( talk) 23:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elsken Jorisdochter is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsken Jorisdochter until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. EricEnfermero ( Talk) 07:07, 27 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

The article Helaine Selin has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 19:06, 22 January 2016 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article CCAvenue is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CCAvenue until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Light2021 ( talk) 17:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Giwargis Warda is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giwargis Warda until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Pyrusca ( talk) 14:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello Novonium,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Corpus Glossary for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Foysol3195 ( talk) 14:31, 13 November 2016 (UTC) reply

The article Corpus Glossary has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of significance.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Zackmann08 ( ^{Talk to me}/ _{What I been doing}) 23:07, 13 November 2016 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on He Qiaonv requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Zackmann08 ( ^{Talk to me}/ _{What I been doing}) 23:08, 13 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Novonium. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Ezetap, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mr. Vernon ( talk) 16:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC) reply

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did at Ezetap. Mr. Vernon ( talk) 16:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dariusz Miłek is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dariusz Miłek until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Robert McClenon ( talk) 15:41, 29 November 2016 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Wolfgang Leitner requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Zackmann08 ( ^{Talk to me}/ _{What I been doing}) 17:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Burkhard Zink, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It appears to be a clear copyright infringement of http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_document.cfm?document_id=3704&language=english. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

  If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.

• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 02:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC) reply

This is your final warning. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 02:09, 3 December 2016 (UTC) reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Siuenti ( talk) 16:49, 2 January 2017 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated copyright violations and an apparent refusal to communicate. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.   Beeblebrox ( talk) 23:05, 2 January 2017 (UTC) reply

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Novonium ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))

---

Request reason:

Please unblock my account. I promise to be careful about copyright issues in the articles that I create or contribute to.

Novonium ( talk) 11:52, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Decline reason:

You were meant to be careful the whole time, and were repeatedly warned. Can you please take the time to explain your new understanding of copyright, and why your previous edits were inappropriate? Yamla ( talk) 12:41, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

To be fair, copyright violations were present in only 2 or 3 articles created by me. All other articles had absolutely no copyright violations. I again request you to unblock my account so that I can continue to contribute to Wikipedia in good faith. Novonium ( talk) 14:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Per Diannaa's comments below, plus all the previous warnings and deletions, this is a patently false statement and shows no understanding of how serious an issue it is to repeatedly add copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Just because you chose to ignore everyone and refuse to speak to them for four years doesn't mean you weren't gven every opportunity to understand and correct these issues long ago. This is a collaborative project, communication is inherently a part of it, and this unblock appeal was your first communication with anyone in over four years. One would hope that after being silent for so long you might now take a moment to finally try and understand what the problem is but unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case and instead you have chsen to deny the true scope of the issue even though your statement is obviously false even without the new findings. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello Novonium,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Aldo Schiavone for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

jcc (
tea and biscuits) 17:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
reply

A tag has been placed on Christos Tsagalis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.lit.auth.gr/en/node/273. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 20:48, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Thomas Spencer Jerome requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://exhibitions.kelsey.lsa.umich.edu/fwk/jerome.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 21:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Ilaria Ramelli requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.amazon.com/Ilaria-L.E.-Ramelli/e/B01M2WJKVL. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 21:05, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Reinold Geiger requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://successstory.com/people/reinold-geiger. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 21:16, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Surveying your contributions from September 2016 to the present, in addition to the above articles which I nominated for deletion, I found and removed copyright violations in the following articles:

• Rolena Adorno
• Donal O'Shea
• He Qiaonv
• Walter Fairservis
• Barbara Hanawalt
• Peter Cozzens
• David Konstan. Therefore copyright violations were not present in only a few articles, but were pretty much ubiquitous. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 21:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

User has been socking as User:Vintelok as well. So, you can add that to the things that will need to be discussed before considering unblock. Beeblebrox ( talk) 01:13, 4 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello Novonium,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mohr Davidow for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:31, 25 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Novonium. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Marley Brant, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marley Brant is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marley Brant (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Spinning Spark 17:30, 23 May 2017 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Boessenecker is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Boessenecker until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BeenAroundAWhile ( talk) 23:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC) reply

The article Keith Rabois has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of secondary source to establish notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 17:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Keith Rabois is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith Rabois until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 23:14, 2 August 2020 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Barkham Burroughs' Encyclopaedia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barkham Burroughs' Encyclopaedia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AleatoryPonderings ( talk) 04:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Strassburg tablet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strassburg tablet until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

D.Lazard ( talk) 18:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of languages by the number of countries in which they are recognized as an official language is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of languages by the number of countries in which they are recognized as an official language until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 12:06, 27 May 2023 (UTC) reply